Mac / PC Encoding workflow question

Hello.
I'm completing a Project shot almost entire using HDV 29.97fps 1080i footage from a sony tape based camcorder.
In order to make my life complicated, I decided to upgrade to from CS4 to CS 5.5 in the middle of the project AND switch from PC to Mac. Surprisingly, the significant glitch that's arisen as a result of this is that you cannot natively encode to WMV files from the Mac version of Premier.
So admittedly, I may be asking the wrong question but here it goes: The reason I want to encode to WMV is that I'm playing back via an xBox 360. Whle the xbox will accept h.264 files, there are surprisingly noticeable differences in the in the quality. Admittedly, this could be entirely due to my inexperience. However, from reading the the xbox FAQ on codecs here: http://support.microsoft.com/kb/945416 I noticed that the WMV files can be encoded at a significantly higher bit rate than h.264 (15 v 10).
The "quality" factors I'm referring to are primarily that I notice significant and distracting motion artifacts in my h.264 attempts. I also THINK that the image is slightly softer. Incidentally, I attempted encoding for the appltv as well with similarly poor results.
So it occurs to me that there are a few potential solutions that I'd love to get some feedback on:
1) Finish my projects on the mac, output to some high quality format (Uncompressed AVI? Blue Ray?), move that output over to the PC and then re-encode in WMV.
2) Figure out how to encode in h.264... I feel like I've tried everything I can think of with the available options.
3) Try a newer media streamer capable of consuming higher bitrate h.264 files? Not even sure if that's my problem.
Any input is greatly appreciated.
PS. Not to hijack my own thread but the Mac in question (details below) has really impressed me. I am editing from the couch from a single drive and am getting pretty close to real-time playback even with up to two color corrected HD streams.
Macbookpro 17
2.3 ghz
8gig ram
500 gig ssd drive
-Ben

In answer to Question 3 (and partially #2), I've recently begun using a WDTV HD appliance, which is made by Western Digital. Playing back HD files (shot in 1080p with a JVC GY-HD700u or 1080i with a Canon XHA1) that have been encoded in h.264 using the preset for Vimeo HD gives me beautiful results on the WDTV appliance. I've also had beautiful playback experience with those encoded files (again, Vimeo HD preset) from any computer or uploaded to the web on Vimeo or YouTube...
So, check out the WDTV appliance (also plays Netflix and Pandora with a network connection). It's pretty sweet... you can play files from a USB thumb drive, or connect it to your network and stream files directly from any computer on your network.

Similar Messages

RED Workflow questions with Mac Pro (including third party plugins)

Hello all,
I’ve been searching many forums for the better part of a day trying to get some workflow questions sorted. I’m experiencing (very) slow export times, and mediocre playback for a machine that should be screaming fast.
Here is what I’m working with:
2014 Mac Pro
-2.7 GHz 12-core intel xeon E5
-64GB Ram
-Dual AMD FirePro D700 6GB
-1TB Flash Storage
Editing all footage off 96TB Raid 6 mini-sas server (getting about 1100mbs read/write rate according to AJA system test) which is faster than any Thunderbolt/TB2 drive array I have.
Media I work with is footage from the RED Epic (normally 5K) as well as DSLR footage from the 5d.
Software:
-PrPro CC 2014 (8.1)
-Magic Bullet Looks 2.5.2
My question(s) pertains to RED post-pro workflow in combination with third party plug-ins and the different approaches to make it more efficient.
Right now, majority of the clients need a 1080p HD master, and they are generally anywhere from 2-8 minutes (usually). So my sequence settings are as follows:
Video:
Editing Mode: RED Cinema
Size: 1920 x 1080
Audio: 48Hz
Video Previews
Preview File Format: I-Frame Only MPEG
Codec: MPEG I-Frame
1920x1080
Maximum Bit Depth unchecked
Maximum Render Quality unchecked
Composite in Linear Color checked
Export Settings
H.264
1920x1080
VBR 1 pass
Target Bitrate 12mbs
Max bitrate 12mbs
Maximum render quality/depth/previews unchecked
Issues I have:
-Playback is fine at 1/2 or even full, but once effects (especially magic bullet looks) start to go on the clips, it’s very choppy and has difficult playback at 1/4
-Export times (especially with magic bullet looks) will take the better part of 1-4 hours for a video that is 3-6 minutes long. This doesn’t seem like it should be the case for a maxed out MacPro
So my questions are:
Do these seem like the right sequence/export settings for mastering at 1080p? If not, what would you suggest?
Would using offline editing help at all?
Do you place your effects on adjustment layers?
Is there anyway to improve export settings when using an array of filters?
Have you stopped using third party plugins for their inefficiency in unreliability and switched to more integrated applications like SpeedGrade?
Is there any other tweaks that you would suggest for RED workflow with PrPro?
Should I consider switching to FCPX or (besides the iMovie-likeness) does it carry problems of its own?

Hi This Is Ironclad,
thisisironclad wrote:
Hello all,
I’ve been searching many forums for the better part of a day trying to get some workflow questions sorted. I’m experiencing (very) slow export times, and mediocre playback for a machine that should be screaming fast.
The biggest issue is that most people have is that updating OS X causes certain folders to be set to Read Only. See this blog post: Premiere Pro CC, CC 2014, or 2014.1 freezing on startup or crashing while working (Mac OS X 10.9, and later).
thisisironclad wrote:
Hello all,
I’ve been searching many forums for the better part of a day trying to get some workflow questions sorted. I’m experiencing (very) slow export times, and mediocre playback for a machine that should be screaming fast.
Here is what I’m working with:
2014 Mac Pro
-2.7 GHz 12-core intel xeon E5
-64GB Ram
-Dual AMD FirePro D700 6GB
-1TB Flash Storage
It's a nice base system. How about an additional speedy disk for media cache files. You also did not mention which version of OS X you are running.
thisisironclad wrote:
Software:
-Magic Bullet Looks 2.5.2
The Red Giant website does not indicate that this software is yet updated to work with Premiere Pro CC 2014.1 (8.1). Proceed with caution here.
thisisironclad wrote:
Issues I have:
-Playback is fine at 1/2 or even full, but once effects (especially magic bullet looks) start to go on the clips, it’s very choppy and has difficult playback at 1/4
I would not use this plug-in until you get the OK from the manufacturer.
thisisironclad wrote:
-Export times (especially with magic bullet looks) will take the better part of 1-4 hours for a video that is 3-6 minutes long. This doesn’t seem like it should be the case for a maxed out MacPro
Again, I suspect your plug-in.
Keep in mind that exports are largely CPU based but you can make sure that GPU acceleration is enabled for AME at the bottom of the Queue panel.
thisisironclad wrote:
So my questions are:
Do these seem like the right sequence/export settings for mastering at 1080p? If not, what would you suggest?
It's OK.
thisisironclad wrote:
Would using offline editing help at all?
No need when you should be able to edit natively. Relinking might also be an issue.
thisisironclad wrote:
Do you place your effects on adjustment layers?
That's one way you can do it with the benefit of being more organized.
thisisironclad wrote:
Have you stopped using third party plugins for their inefficiency in unreliability and switched to more integrated applications like SpeedGrade?
I do. Of course, that's a preference.
thisisironclad wrote:
Is there any other tweaks that you would suggest for RED workflow with PrPro?
Try the following:
Sign out from Creative Cloud, restart Premiere Pro, then sign in
Update any GPU drivers
Trash preferences
Ensure Adobe preference files are set to read/write(Hopefully you checked this out already)
Delete media cache
Remove plug-ins
If you have AMD GPUs, make sure CUDA is not installed
Repair permissions
Disconnect any third party hardware
If you have a CUDA GPU, ensure that the Mercury Playback Engine is set to CUDA, not OpenCLYou have AMD GPUs.
Disable App Nap
Reboot
thisisironclad wrote:
Should I consider switching to FCPX or (besides the iMovie-likeness) does it carry problems of its own?
I really shouldn't answer that question.
Hope this helps.
Thanks,
Kevin

Yet Another Workflow Question

Ok I too, like many others here, am new to the Mac (thanks to Apple's I'm a Mac, I'm a PC ads that my wife couldn't get enough of). I have done some searching around and I see that there are quite a few iMovie workflow questions out there. I have not quite found what I am looking for however, so I thought I would make my first post tonight. So here it goes...
I have 3 different ways I capture video:
1. Canon Vixia HF10 (HD)
2. Canon Powershot (SD)
3. Blackberry Storm (SD...I know it isn't a good phone)
I record everything to SD cards. I am wanting to know the best way to store my raw video for editing at any time. Do I copy the AVCHD file structure (for the Vixia) and .avi files (for the other non HD) to my hdd, or do I just import into iMovie '09 and let it reside there, or both? I noticed that iMovie had an archival option (which appears to just copy the AVCHD structure to my hdd), which is why I ask. I want to always keep my raw video in case I decide to go back later and create a new video.
After I have the raw video archived, I would like to know the best way to use iMovie. Depending on where I end up storing the raw video, should I keep the imported video in iMovie once I am finished with a project, and then reimport it at a later date if need be? Or, do I leave it in iMovie as events? I guess this all rely depends on the first question...where do I store the raw video for archival purposes...
Finally, when exporting my iMovie project, should I store that in more of a, pardon the Windows reference, "My Videos" folder with a original size, web optimized size, and ipod optimized size? Thus, keeping the actual exported version of the project separate from the raw video?
I hope I have asked the right questions here. I appreciate any and all help I can get!
Ron

Welcome Ron to the  iMovie boards..
very interesting : 'switchers' care sooo much for 'storage strategies' ..
the by Apple intended workflow/concept for iApps is:
any 'photocam' related material (still or movin') comes-in via iPhoto, and is stored in an iP Library (=you can tell iP to create 2/many Libs, if you prefer to organize manually....)
any 'camcorder' related material HAS to be imported by iM - why? because, iM has some internal routines to make such material editable (codecs, thumnails, stuff....). the same material as 'file by Finder' does not import.. in most cases!
storage..
iP stores in its Library (local/internal HDD and/or ext. HDD)
iM stores in Events (local/internal HDD and/or ext. HDD)
to make Projects/Albums accessible to any iApp, you should keep your fingers off that structure.
Erasing Events 'kills' projects.
allthough, once 'shared to media browser' there's a 'copy' of your project WITHIN the project file. (= the socalled Media Browser is no single Folder somewhere hidden in the system)
there's this Spacesaver feature to erase any Event content which is not in use in any project to keep Events lean.
use the Archive feature from within iM to keep things easy and convenient.. if you miss a single file of the SDcard file-structure, the whole card's content is kaputt ..
summary:
• use iApps as intended.
• use iP for cameras, it stores 'raws' (the avi too)
• use iM for camcorders, use Archive to store raws..
• purchase a dozend of HDDs to store your material..

Best HD Encoding Workflow for Web

Hi
I am wanting to have HD video files shot on Sony XDCAMEX format
(1920 x 1080, 24p) encoded for the Web to be deployed at
full-screen high-quality and am wondering what
the best encoding workflow for this is in terms of exporting from FCP to
either Uncompressed or H.264 and then using Sorensen Pro perhaps?
thanks,
Evan

If you don't know as much as you say, than I highly suggest hiring a consultant. DO NOT rely on what you hear from these forums, as many people will give you bad advice. And not to mention that that is a lot of ground to cover and to expect to learn about from an online forum. There are those of us who spend years and decades obtaining the knowledge we have, often paying for advice from consultants.
I can highly recommend Mike Curtis in the Austin Texas area for consulting: www.hdforindies.com. Also Larry Jordan at www.larryjordan.biz...Phil Hodgetts at www.digitalproductionbuzz.com...and myself at www.LFHD.net.
You get what you pay for. Free advice might be sketchy. And consumer monitors via HDMI will get you good results if you plan on delivering DVDs, but not if you plan on any sort of broadcast delivery.
If you have customers that want to do HD production they need to talk to HD production experts, not web people. I would not recommend any broadcast people to consult about web delivery...I know I wouldn't recommend myself.
Shane

Sharpening export workflow question

I have a sharpening workflow question. Say I have pictures from a portrait session I just finished. I have to send 10 pictures the client ordered to a print lab and I also will make some small facebook sized pictures and upload them to my business facebook page. The level of sharpening needed for large prints (I upload to print lab as RGB JPEGS) and sharpening needed for the very small sRGB facebook-sized pictures is different. In Lightroom I have the option to set the sharpening on export and have a bunch of presets that alter the export size, color space, sharpening, etc(WHCC print lab, facebook, Client CD, etc). I don't see how to do that in Aperture. I see they have the option if you have a printer, but not on normal export.
For those of you that have to export batches of pictures in multiple different sizes (with different levels of sharpening), what is your workflow? I could use some photoshop droplets/actions after Aperture export but I was hoping there was a way to avoid the extra step. Am I overlooking an export feature? The BorderFX plug-in looks like the only other option.
Thank you in advance for time and help!
Scott

Frank Scallo Jr wrote:
The thing is guys - Once a file is sized down it WILL lose sharpening - what we are doing is sharpening the full size RAW file or rather what the full size output would be like. Once we export a version sized down it will lose some of the 'bite'. LR has sharpening options on 'output' which is not only smart but a necessity. Adobe realizes that output for screen needs another sharpen. Apple either doesn't know or didn't bother. It makes ANY output for screen less than best.
Bear in mind that there seem to be two separate issues going on here - sharpening adjustments not being applied on export, and resizing.
As far as resizing is concerned, Aperture appears to use something roughly equivalent to Photoshop's Bicubic Sharper setting. Because of this I've never had much problem with Aperture's exports when used for the web, but obviously everyone's taste for sharpening differs which is why an option for output sharpening would be good.
Sharpening adjustments not being applied on export is a separate issue and should be reported via the feedback form ASAP by everyone who is experiencing the bug.
Now printing is another animal - I wouldn't print directly from RAW in aperture either if I'm printing small. Again, LR beats Aperture here as well since they include output sharpening for print.
Aperture has had output sharpening for printing since 2.0 came out (unless it in was 1.5). In A3 you need to turn on 'More Options' and scroll down, I can't remember where it is in A2. I don't know how effective it is as I print via a lab, but it's there and it's been there for a long time...
Ian

Am a new mac user, my is question is how to get mac os x 10.5 on to my mac 10.4

am a new mac user, my is question is how to get mac os x 10.5 on to my mac 10.4?.

Skip 10.5 and buy Mac OS X 10.6 from the online Apple Store.
(81944)

Workflow Question - Recently moved from PC to Mac

So, let me say that I'm a die hard Windows user -- in fact, in my "day job" I own a software development company and we're a "Microsoft shop". But, my side business is Photography and I'm making the switch to the Mac & Aperture. So, what I'm hoping to get from this post is a "yes, you can do that" or a "no, you can't do that" with Aperture. I'm happy to figure out how -- I just need someone to tell me if it's possible.
Here's my current workflow (coming from the PC - which required several applications to accomplish these steps):
1) Import images and rename "IMG_1234.CR2" to "1234.CR2" -- essentially dropping the "IMG_" from the name. Is this possible w/ Aperture?
2) Do all of the processing on the images (No questions here yet -- got that pretty well figured out in Aperture).
3) Create a black & white version of each image. Currently doing this by making a duplicate version in Aperture. But, I would like it to be named "1234-BW.CR2" rather than just have "version 2" tacked on the end. Is this possible in Aperture?
4) "Develop" the pics into jpg's. Again, the final image names should be "1234.jpg" and "1234-BW.jpg" respectively. Again, the question has to do with renaming the original & duplicate version of the image.
5) Choose all of the color versions of the photos and then selectively pick some of the b/w versions and export them to a "Web" size along w/ Thumbnail versions that will be posted on my web site. (Again, this should be easy if I can name things like I want them to be named in question 3 & 4.)
So, right now I'm the biggest thing that I'm having a problem with in naming the images -- how flexible is Aperture with this? I've tried to customize the naming but can't see to figure out how to simply remove the "IMG_" when importing and then how to tack on "-BW" when creating a duplicate version.
So far I really like Aperture -- it will ultimately save me from having to use 5 different applications on the PC and thus greatly improve the efficiency of my workflow. There are some things I've noticed that would be nice -- for example, on the PC I used a program called Bibble Pro to "develop" my Canon RAW files. Bibble is a little smoother (read faster) when making some adjustments. For example, when I'm in full screen mode and adjust the exposure, contrast or sharpening Aperture is not as smooth and "real-time" as Bibble. (And, the Mac I have is the top of the line iMac made today w/ 2GB of RAM. So, I would assume that processor speed is not an issue.)
Anyway, if you have any insight into this post please let me know. Thanks in advance for any help you can provide... If you want to see my web site to understand what I'm doing the URL is http://www.level3photography.com/proofs.aspx
Thanks again!
TK Herman
[email protected]
iMac Mac OS X (10.4.8)

...the Mac I have is the
top of the line iMac made today w/ 2GB of RAM. So, I
would assume that processor speed is not an issue...
Many folks from other disciplines think that applications should, well, just run on any computer. Not so with graphics apps. Photoshop, for instance, slows if not provided a second physical hard drive for scratch disk; Aperture craves GPU hardware; both gobble RAM; etc. Existing PSCS2 Photoshop performance improves up to 8 GB RAM, and we have not yet empirically determined the max amount of RAM Aperture will benefit from but it certainly is more than 2 GB.
iMacs are consumer machines, not pro graphics boxes, even though many folks successfully use them as such. And, "top of the line iMac made today" would include not the 7300 GT graphics but the 7600 GT graphics card and 3 GB of RAM rather than 2 GB.
All that said, your iMac should run Aperture well if you keep the box well maintained. Just don't be surprised if you do see some hardware imposed limitations.
-Allen Wicks

Workflow Questions - Premiere on Mac - for FLV file

Hi.
I want to add subtitles to an FLV file using Premiere Pro. I'm working on a Mac.
I know that I can't use the FLV so I would have to convert the FLV to an intermediate format first. Then Import that into Premiere, add the subtitles, render and convert back to FLV.
So my question isn't directly associated with Premiere, but I would like to know what you guys would recommend as far as the workflow I've described. What intermediate file format would be best so as lose minimal quality? Which software to use for the conversion from the FLV and back into the subtitled FLV?
Thanks!

Hi.
I want to add subtitles to an FLV file using Premiere Pro. I'm working on a Mac.
I know that I can't use the FLV so I would have to convert the FLV to an intermediate format first. Then Import that into Premiere, add the subtitles, render and convert back to FLV.
So my question isn't directly associated with Premiere, but I would like to know what you guys would recommend as far as the workflow I've described. What intermediate file format would be best so as lose minimal quality? Which software to use for the conversion from the FLV and back into the subtitled FLV?
Thanks!

New to PrPro with specific workflow questions

Hi, All!
I'm a 20+ year video veteran wading into the Premiere Pro pool this year. I have an extensive Avid and FCP background. Please don't hold that against me! I also realize this is long, but I'm trying to cram everything in so you can see where I've been to possibly re-route me, make it understandable, and at least a wee bit interesting.
I'm currently running PrPro 5.5.2 on a MBP 2.8 GHz Intrel Core 2 Duo with 4GB RAM. My media storage is a 2TB Sonnet Tempo RAID partition over eSATA to an Express34 card on the MBP.
I've sucessfully been doing AVC-Intra projects in PrPro for the last few months. This new project is different, and I want to see if there is any way to make my process more efficient. It's a very simple project, but it's very long. I'm finding as I do my workflow tests that the render, export and conversion process I had been doing for the short AVC-Intra projects (which were in the 5-7 minute range) are going to be very time consuming on this project, which has a hefty 2 1/2 hour run time over 14 modules. The editing is simple, if not cookie-cutter. It's creating the deliverables that's going to be the real bear here. I'm hoping your collective experience can offer me a better workflow that what I've cobbled together from my other knowledge and previous forum searches.
The nitty gritty:
These videos are basically putting a narrator to PowerPoint presentation and prettying it up with a music stinger at the open and close and adding a nicer-than-PPT transition betweeen the slides. I have an AIFF audio track for narration, AIFF music file from SmartSound, PNG graphic files (converted PowerPoint deck), & an animated Apple PNG transition. (from the Digital Juice people. It's one of their "Swipes".)
I started with a AVC-Intra timeline because that seemed to me to be the highest quality. I understand this was probably my first error. The renders are taking about run time for the module. With these elements and the following deliverables, what Sequence Settings do you recommend I should be using?
My deliverables will be myriad, which is why I want to export out a high-quality master file out of PrPro and then do the mulitple conversions to other sizes & codecs in a compression app. I have Encore, Sorenson Squeeze, and Compressor at my disposal. I'm guessing Encore will be my friend here, but it's also the one I know the least.
I tried exporting out a ProRes file. That took over 40 minutes on a 14 minute module. Then I converted that to a 640 x 360 H.264 to upload as an approval file. That took about 35 minutes. (I used Compressor becasue I have a droplet craeated for that and it's what I have been sucessfully been using to make small, good-looking files that my clients can reasonably download or stream).
Next I tried exporting out the highest quality H.264 at 1920x1080 and tried converting that using my Compressor droplet. That took 50 minutes to export out of PrPro, but it saves me one step of converting to a full size H.264. What I'm not sold on is whether or not that file is the best file I should be using to make the other deliverables.
What I will eventually need to deliver is a family of H.264 in various sizes from 1920x1080 to 320x180 & an authored DVD. So we're talking hours of processing for each one if I go with what I know.
Since the only thing that moves in these videos are a handful of animated transitions (10-15 per module) and a fade in & fade out, my gut tells me I could make this happen faster if I only changed a few things in my workflow. I'm just at a loss as to what those things might be.
Another little note. The client will wnat to custominze these with different logos, so I will have to be able to get in, add or change a logo super, and re-export and re-convert all 2 1/2 hours multiple times. A more efficeint way to do that would be very helpful. Both for my sanity and my clients' budget.
Any insight would be greatly appreciated! Thanks!!
deb

>avoid 24 hours of processing
Adding to what was just posted
The computer I replaced in 2010 was based on the Pentium4 CPU (Windows XP with CS3) and when I was done editing my SD video and ready to create a DVD, I would start Encore before I went to bed, so it would have an ISO ready for disc writing in the morning
The computer I have now is described in http://forums.adobe.com/thread/652694 and my entire process of going from AVCHD to an SD AVI and then the encoding to ISO in Encore is just a bit over real time (maybe twice real time, but that is subjective, not based on a stop watch)
CPU cores and speed plus lots of ram (12Gig for my motherboard... 16Gig for newer technology motherboards) and multiple fast hard drives ALL make a difference
Your computer is, very simply, just barely able to run PPro... I have NO idea what is available in the Mac world, but to have "acceptable" speed, you need a new computer

Free AC3 encoding workflow

Like most of you, I was annoyed to find out I couldn't create AC3 surround sound files with my CS4 software, and also that we got downgraded from Audition to Soundbooth. We all paid a lot for it! I know many people have ranted about that already, so enough said.
Here is a workflow that gets around that problem without ponying up for the SurCode Plug-in, and/or buying Audition!
To convert your mixed 5.1 audio, or stereo audio, to the DVD standard AC3 file that Encore wants, download the latest version of Audacity here: http://audacity.sourceforge.net/ It is available for Mac OS X, Microsoft Windows, GNU/Linux, and other operating systems. If you don't know already, it's free!
Now, before I start getting flamed, about Audacity, it works great! The UI is not the most modern, but the quality is top-notch. I've used it for years and most complaints about it are unjustified.
You'll need to download the latest version: "Beta: 1.3x - for advanced users." There will soon, I hope, be an Audacity 2.0 stable release. Until then, use the Beta release for this workflow.
Note: I'll focus on Premiere Pro CS4, because that is where I originally troubleshooted this, but something similar will work for the other Adobe products that use sound.
Workflow:
Create your mixed 5.1 surround sound audio in Premiere, and output the audio only by going to File > Export > Media, and selecting "Windows Waveform" as the output. You should only have "Export Audio" checked. Verify the format in the Summary section. You should see something like: 48000 Hz, 5.1 Surround, 16 bit. Now under Audio codec, make sure "Uncompressed" is selected. Click Okay, and Adobe Media Encoder should launch. Click "Start Queue" and your audio file will be created. You'll get an interleaved 6 channel wave file. Not all applications will open it, but Audacity will.
Note: When you mix your surround sound in the Audio Mixer, you'll place your little "Puck" where you want the sound to come from. Picture yourself in the middle of the "dish," if it's a puck, isn't it in a rink, as in hockey rink...ah, but I digress. Anyway, you'll notice that volume meters in the 5.1 (6 channel) Master section are laid out in the following order: L,R,LS,RS,C,LFE. Also, if you open a 5.1 audio file in the Source panel, you'll see the same order from top to bottom: L,R,LS,RS,C,LFE.   Soundbooth also does it that way. Ahh....Adobe...nice try.
The actual channel order should be L,R,C,LFE,LS,RS. That's the order that you'll probably have to assign in the "Audio Output Mapping" section in the properties menu to get your channels to play correctly with your surround sound hardware. L,R,C,LFE,LS,RS is also the order that interleaved files use. So after you create your 5.1 file, and open it in another audio program that displays them in the "proper" order, like Audacity, you'll see your tracks laid out from top to bottom in that order. I'm not sure why Adobe does it that way, but oh well.
Surround sound primer:
The LFE channel is not, despite popular misconception, a subwoofer channel. Bass from all the channels in a surround sound Amplifier is summed and sent out to the Subwoofer. The LFE channel is supposed to be used only for very low frequencies, to create extra ...oomph. I think that is the technical term. It is not supposed to be used for bass frequencies from the other tracks. It is for explosions, dinosaur footsteps, ...etc.
Audacity will open DVD ".vob" files, and even let you select which stream (usually Language) to open. As an example, open up a movie with some action in it like Ironman (The movie starts at "VTS_03_1.vob") and look at the LFE channel. It's the 4th track from the top in Audacity. You'll see it's silent except at parts where there is thumping AC/DC music at the Intro, or explosions. It's not used as a subwoofer channel!
With that in mind, you may have noticed, unless I'm missing something, that there is no way in the Premiere Mixer to assign an audio track only to the LFE channel. Sure, you can dial up the "Bass Clef" knob to 0.00 db, and send a mono channel's audio to the LFE channel, but there is no place to put the "Puck" that only outputs to LFE. There is one for the center channel, but without someplace to put it, your 40 Hz dinosaur footprint "Thump" is going to also be assigned to some of the other channels. Which channels depends on your "Puck" placement. This is not correct. Again, unless I'm missing something, Adobe needs to correct this oversight. We'll get back to this problem with a solution later, but first let's continue with the AC3 issue.
At this point you should have your wave file. If you want to apply any global changes to all 6 channels, you can open it in Adobe Soundbooth and trim the beginning or end, and apply effects to the entire file. You cannot, however, make changes to individual channels. Audacity will! We'll get to that later.
Encode with Audacity:
Install the software and go to Edit > Preferences > Libraries, and click on "Download" for the "FFmpeg Library." This is the library that Audacity will use to create the .AC3 file. Once installed, the library version should show up next to "FFmpeg Library Version" While the "Audacity Preferences" window is still open, select "Import/Export" and select "Use Custom Mix", this is used to export a 5.1 channel file. Now you're ready to open your .wave file from Premiere. Drag and drop it in the Audacity workspace and you should see 6 mono tracks laid out from top to bottom in the following order: L,R,C,LFE,LS,RS. Audacity will let you edit the individual tracks, unlike Soundbooth, thanks Adobe. But for now, we'll keep it simple. Set your "Project Rate" in audacity in the lower-left corner to what you want the AC3 file to be. For DVD, chose 48000 (Hz). If you leave it at 44100 (Hz) Encore won't import it.
Your almost done. Now let's export the file. Go to Files > Export... > and select "AC3 Files (FFmpeg)" in the "Save as type:" drop-down. Click the "Options..." button and set the "Bit Rate:" for your file. For 5.1 AC3 audio, probably 448. Now enter a file name and click "Save." This will open the "Advanced Mixing Options" window. This allows you to re-map the tracks to a different channel order. It should be correct, and it should show "Output Channels:" set to 6. Press "OK" and you're done.
Presto, you have a 5.1 channel AC3 file. Use that in Encore, or whatever DVD creation program you use, and when you play your DVD you'll have full 5.1 audio coming out your surround sound Amplifier. That is if you have one.
Test your file:
If you want to test your file, you can do a couple of things. Since Soundbooth and Adobe Bridge won't even open AC3 files, and Encore will open but only play the Left and Right channels in the preview, you'll have to either import the file into Premiere, or use another media player.
If you got Premiere to play your surround properly, then you can drag and drop the file into the "Project" panel and preview it from there. You will hear all 6 channels in the correct speakers, but I did notice that the quality is not very good. Maybe Premiere doesn't decode AC3 all that well. I heard some crackle that isn't in the file. How do I know it isn't just a bad encoding job by Audacity? Because I played the file with the VLC media player, and Cyberlink PowerDVD on the same computer, and also on a DVD in my home theater system with no artifacts. Maybe Premiere doesn't decode AC3 files well.
The VLC player, will play almost any file in the known universe, and at least on my computer, it automatically played the AC3 surround file, created by Audacity, with all the channels mapped correctly. That's right, full surround out my speakers with only default settings. It's a great player. Get it for free here: http://www.videolan.org/
Test with Encore:
So far so good. Now open Encore, drop the AC3 file in an empty project, throw it on a Timeline and build the project without Video, It will autoplay without a menu this way. If you set the End-Action to the same AC3 file it will repeat continuously. Either burn this to DVD-RW and test it in your DVD player, or better yet, Build the project to a DVD Image instead, and mount it in a virtual DVD   Drive with a program like "Virtual CloneDrive."
If you don't know what that is, or how to do it, it is very simple. Go to: http://www.slysoft.com/en/ and download "Virtual Clonedrive." It is free. It tricks your operating system into thinking you have another physical DVD drive. In fact, it can create up to 8 virtual drives. Now you don't have to waste time burning, and erasing DVD's every time you make a change to a project. You can build your project as a DVD Image from Encore, save the .iso file to your Desktop and "mount" it (load it) in Virtual Clonedrive. You're computer will now think you loaded a DVD into a physical drive, and launch whatever DVD player you have installed. Mine launches "Cyberlink PowerDVD" which plays the AC3 audio-only DVD in full surround sound on my computer.
Building and testing projects this way will save you endless hours. If you need to make a quick change, just "Unmount" the .iso in Virtual Clonedrive, rebuild your project to the same filename, and "Mount" it again. Instant testing!
Now, as promised, back to that LFE Channel problem with Premiere that I mentioned:
Audacity will let you modify the individual channels in your interleaved 6-Channel file. So don't put anything in that channel in your Premiere mixer. Leave the "Bass Clef" knobs at full CCW position ( -00 db ). The bass from the other channels will go to your subwoofer automatically in your Amplifier.
Now if you have some low frequency effects files, open them in Audacity. You can open multiple instances of Audacity at the same time by going to "File > New." Then, copy and paste them into the LFE Track at the correct point.
Audacity newbie Hint: Audacity doesn't yet have a "Mix-Paste" function, so to avoid altering the track length as you paste in your clips, do the following: Select the LFE track by clicking on it's info area. The info area should say something like "Mono, 48000Hz" Then press "Delete," That will remove everything from the track. Now copy and paste your clips into the track by clicking once with the "Selection Tool" where you want the clip to start, and selecting "Edit > Paste." If you need to fine tune the position of the pasted clip, use the "Time Shift Tool" to move it left or right. If you work from left to right, then you won't push clips over when you paste new ones in.
There is another way to do this by opening up new tracks, using the "Mix and Render" function, and re-ordering the tracks to maintain the L,R,C,LFE,LS,RS channel order. But that's for advanced users.
Where to get thumpy effects?:
Remember, Audacity will open DVD ".vob" files. Just remember to get permission from the copyright owner. HeHe.
PS If you can't get your surround sound to work with Premiere on your computer, see my other tutorial.

After further research, there is a better AC3 encoder out there than the FFMPEG that Audacity uses. It is a more sophisticated implementation of the format. Unlike FFMPEG, it uses floating point numbers instead of integers internally, among other things. It is also updated periodically. Although the pace is glacial.
You can read about it here: http://aften.sourceforge.net/
The easiest way to use it is with a graphical front-end like "wavtoac3encoder" found here: http://code.google.com/p/wavtoac3encoder/
You don't need to change anything from the default settings.
Just follow my tutorial above and instead of using Audacity to create the AC3 file after you are done editing, output the multi-track file in .wav format uncompressed from Audacity. Then drag and drop it into "wavtoac3encoder"and create your file.
If you don't need to edit the multi-track .wav file from Premiere in Audacity, then just drag and drop that file into "wavtoac3encoder" and encode.
The quality, although probably not as good as SurCode, sounds good to me.
Remember, this is strictly for non-commercial use.

Does Final Cut Express 4 work with mac mini and other questions...?

I have a few questions I need help in answering... I would appreciate opinions on the following:
I am about to make a purchase of a new mac. I already have a mac mini PPC, but it is too slow...
Here is what I am thinking.
Mac mini, 2GB mem, 160GB hard drive. Will this new mac mini work with Final Cut Express 4?
Or should I go with the more powerful iMac?
I like to make movies on my mac but I hate iMovie 08 so I constantly use iMovie HD 06. Should I go to Final Cut Express 4 or just stick with iMovie HD 06?

There is no doubt that FCE 4 will run on an Intel mini - the GMA graphics processor is compatible. There is also no doubt that an iMac would give you somewhat better overall performance, though it's important perhaps to note that as complex as FCE is, it is actually a little less demanding on hardware than iMovie has traditionally been, so the difference between a mini with 2Gb RAM and a similarly equipped iMac will not be all that great in FCE, though it will become a little more noticeable if you continue to use iMovie 6.
The main reason for the performance difference between iMovie and FCE is that in order to provide a reasonably sophisticated video editing package that will run on very basic hardware, Apple relied heavily on caching techniques, meaning that while FCE basically spools from video and relies on CPU power, iMovie constantly moves data to and from the hard drive. The mini's hard drive is a (relatively) slow device in comparison to the iMac's - thus the iMac runs iMovie rather more seamlessly. In FCE, the difference is, as said, rather less clear unless you were to go for the top-end model.
If your budget can stretch to an iMac it makes sense to go that route simply because the extra power and overall performance (and the better graphics processor) will give you greater flexibility down the road. On the other hand, if funds are tight and you need to spend as little as reasonably possible, a mini will do fine, and is sufficient;y inexpensive that in a couple of years could be sold off and replaced without severe financial implications.
In terms of the choice between FCE or iMovie, beware that if you haven't used FCE before, the transition is not easy, and the learning curve for it is pretty steep. That said, it has far greater power and flexibility in terms of what you can achieve with it than has ever been possible with iMovie.
That said, for casual and home use, iMovie (version 6 at least) has plenty of power and tools for the majority of projects. iMovie 8 is, in many ways, deeply flawed for those who want that sort of power and workflow tools, being that it is designed for quick and easy creation of movies, not creative and considered productions. It has it's uses, but if you have experience with iMovie already, v8 is really not intended for you at all.
All that said, I've used iMovie 6 on systems will a lot less power than the current Intel minis, and have found it stable and workable, so I have no doubt it would work well on any current Mac.

IPhoto 6 workflow questions -- iPhoto & Elements

All -- just installed iLife 6, but have not used it yet. The combination of iWeb & .mac looks very promising for finally being able to easily share my photos with my family/friends. But I am still not clear on the best file workflow to be able to take advantage of all the iPhoto/iWeb/,mac functionality, and also the editing power of Adobe Elements (the editing software I am using). If you all could help me with this I would be so grateful.
I shoot JPEG.
I move a photo from iPhoto to Element to edit it.
If my goal is to move it back to iPhoto to share, how should I resize it? How should I optimize it for the best quality while viewing on a monitor, but with enough quality that if folks want to make a print, they can?
What format should I save it back to iPhoto in? JPEG? Or can iPhoto handle TIF or PSD and is that recommended?
What about a master, unedited image. Should I worry about that? And if so, where will that live?
If I plan on printing a photo, should I optimize the file for that purpose and print from Elements instead of bringing the file back into iPhoto?
As you can see from my questions, I am still unclear on the relationship of iPhoto and Elements (or any other editing software). I would be so grateful for any help you can give in this discussion, or other places you can point me to get this information.
Thanks everyone!
Greg

haha, the way I work is, if a program doesn't do what I want the way I want it, then I find a program that does. For many, just iPhoto will fit the bill.
This is what I do. I take a photo shoot. If it is important photos, I upload them to ClubPhoto so others can download and print them. Most often I do not print my 4x6 photos. I wait till there is a special at ClubPhoto for half price prints and order all my yearly prints at that time. I buy one photo album that fits 200 photos and I order 200 photos from my albums online to be printed. Year in photos are now done.
If someone comes over and says, hey, I love that photo, can you print it out for me? then I use my Printers software to print the 4x6 or 8x10.
I used .mac and now iWeb to keep family and friends informed of whats going on in Photos and videos. It's more or less just for fun.
When I said I have an iWeb site, I mean that I have used iWeb, a new application in the iLife suite to publish a web site with photos movie clips and a blog.
You do not have to do any resizing if you are going to use iWeb as the software does it for you behind the lines.
If you are resizing to upload anywhere else or for another purpose, it all depends on what size you need for your purpose. For album sites, 800x600 is a good size.
For emailing a photo, either do it right within iPhoto and you will get a choice on what size you want to send, or export to the desktop, at which time you can input the size you want to export the photo at.
I always keep full resolution photos in my library. If I want a smaller size, I always export the image at a smaller size and keep the full size in the library.

RAW workflow questions - image degradation over several edits with 08?

I currently use Aperture to manage (and edit) my digital photo library. After reading about iphoto 08, the only major thing I can see preventing me from using it would be the RAW editing.
An example would be a photo taken in RAW format and edited in iPhoto. It is saved as a JPEG. Any future editing ontop of that jpeg and the image begins degrading as levels of compression are added ontop of it (I think).
In Aperture, the raw file is maintained and any editing to the RAW file becomes non-destructive as the RAW format is retained in "real time" (so to speak).
I know iPhoto also retains the original RAW file, but not the edited RAW file.
My question is this: with the great extra features of iPhoto (such as easier integration with .Mac) I am seriously considering a switch, but am concerned about image degradation. For all the semi-pro users, what is your RAW workflow in regards to iPhoto? Do you edit the file once, then when editing is required in the future just re-edit the JPEG or go back to the original RAW?
For any former Aperture users who switched to iPhoto, was it worth it?
Thanks!!

Terence,
Once again, thank you for a most helpful answer. I was wondering about the same issue. I guess this means that when you edit RAW files in iPhoto, it uses a similar approach than Aperture and Lightroom now. With far less options of course, but if you just doing basic editing of white balance and shadow/highlight, iPhoto is an appealing alternative.
If I understand correctly the Raw conversion is done at the system level, so iPhoto and APerture even use the same conversion engine, right?
Thank you
Bo

Advice Needed: Mac-based Video Workflow

Greetings all,
My congregation is thinking of purchasing an iMac to use to produce a video of each Sunday's message. I use a MacBook Pro and am a strong proponent of getting a Mac for this purpose. I'm in charge of researching the purchase. So, I'm posting here to bounce some ideas off everyone and see if anyone has any experience that could help me.
So, typically a Sunday message lasts 15-20 minutes. We're looking for a camera that shoots in HD and stores the video as editable files on the camera. Then, as soon as the message is done, we'll have our video operator transfer the video files to the iMac, add some titles, and then export it in HD for posting to Vimeo. We want to find a workflow that goes quickly so the operator doesn't have to stay around forever waiting for the export process.
As far as I know, that rules out AVCHD codec with iMovie, right? I understand it requires a lengthy decompression time, so that even a real-time capture of HDV would be faster!
So, my questions are twofold:
1) Does anyone know a camera that records HD files that could be transferred very quickly into iMovie?
and
2) Is a new iMac fast enough to export a 15-20 minute HD movie in 15-30 minutes?
Thanks so much!

Well, we want to go to HD. I'm well versed in the normal process of video making. I use a Canon HV20. I've just been asked to make the entire workflow happen in a much shorter time, since we have to have it complete before folks leave from the church. I was hoping we could add titles and the like in iMovie and go to HD, but that doesn't seem like a feasible option in the time window I have. I think I'm leaning toward getting a Sanyo Xacti HD1010 that records as MPEG files in the H.264 codec. Then we can just forgo the titling and simply place a raw file up to Vimeo and still have it be HD.
The only thing I'm worried about now is staying under the 1 GB file limit with native shooting on a camera like that. You can shoot 1280×720 video on that camera at 9 mbits/sec, but I think for a Sunday sermon crossing the 15-16 minute threshold, we'd be over the 1 GB file limit that Vimeo and YouTube have. Yeesh. It seems there's not "fast" way to get HD video online. It takes a little bit more time, but that's to be expected with the higher quality. It doesn't bother me for my home movies!

Colour Space / Workflow question.

Hi,
I have been seconded to take photos at an up and coming family wedding.
I will be using a Canon 300D Digital SLR, shooting in RAW, and performing post processing on a Mac using Aperture (yet to be purchased).
I have established that my print lab works in the Adobe 1998 colour space. So, please let me know if I have the this right:
As long as my screen is calibrated, and I work in and save my images as Adobe 1998, my prints should accurately resemble what was present on my screen?
Is there a preference for which format (jpg, tiff, etc.) the images should be saved in for ensuring accurate print output from a pro lab ? They charge per print for RAW conversion, so I'm looking at saving finals as TIFF as the logical alternative.
Also - can someone tell me if I should necessarily set the camera parameters to any particular colour space ? On the Canon, I have the option to set Adobe RGB, or a number of Canon pre-sets, or in fact set my own pre-sets for tone, colour saturation etc. Does this even matter if I'm shooting in RAW ?
Any other advice on how I can ensure consistency in this workflow for this and future projects ?
Sorry for all the questions, but many thanks,
Paul
MacBook Pro Mac OS X (10.4.7) 23" Cinema Display

I took your advice and sought more info from my lab.
They have provided me with a calibration image on CD
as well as a print of the same to do some side by
side comarison with my monitor. They also provided a
colour settings file for Photoshop. Armed with all of
this I seem to be getting closer to understanding the
necessary adjustments (although I temporarily
confused things by introducing my home printer into
the equation, until I realised that this thing also
has it's own colour settings).
To me, it sounds like the color settings file for Photoshop is most likely the color profile data I was talking about - does it end in .icc? What are the instructions for installation?
After you install it you can check the "Proofing Profile" dropdown in Aperture to see if you see anything like it - you'll need to restart Aperture after you install the icc profile (I think).
You can import the image from teh CD into Aperture and try using the proofing with the color profile sent to see how close it looks.
Basically the idea of the proofing and the profile is that by turning on on-screen proofng, you are taking the colors you have and seeing how the smaller range of color availaible in the printer will reflect what you have.. this gives you the ability to alter tones until the image you have better fits into the range of colors the printer can produce.
I haven't purchased Aperture yet, but I presume there
will be a way to invoke settings similar to the
colour settings in Photoshop so that what I'm seeing
in Aperture will be consistent ?
Yes, sorry for the above then which will be of little use until you get Aperture - basically there is a "Proofing Profile" dropdown and a command to enable or disable "Onscreen Proofing" (which is just like CS2's "Proof Colors").
Aperture makes use of any color profile defined in the system, so hopefully the installation instructions are for general OS X color profile installation. If it's an icc file you can install it for use with all of OS X.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but from what you're saying
it actually makes no difference what parameters I
specify in my camera if I'm shooting in RAW ? This is
good to know, as the Adobe RGB setting in the Canon
is actually quite 'washed out' - and I'd prefer to
keep it in one of the sRGB settings for my 'snaphot /
home printing' needs wheh shooting jpegs. So,
provided I export in Aperture to Adobe RGB (my lab's
preference) and work with a calibrated screen I
should be okay ?
Yes, all true. I just want to make sure to note that the choice of color profile does make a difference shooting JPG as it will affect the colors that are defined in the file (and the viewing of them in a browser), but from your comment above it seems you understood that aspect.
I calibrated my current monitor (using software only
at this stage). Does it particulary matter which
colour space I choose to start from, if I'm modifying
brightness, gamma, temperature etc. to save as a
custom profile ?
I'm not sure here what you mean by "color space you choose to start from".
Also for profiling even a cheap device like the Huey would probably be a lot better than the software profiling - I went that route at first as well but the hardware stuff is worth it.
One last, slightly dumb, question. Are "Adobe RGB
1998" and "Adobe RGB" the same thing ?
Yep, pretty much the same thing by slightly different names.

Mac / PC Encoding workflow question

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for